We continue our examination of the qualifications necessary for those who serve as elders in the Lord's church. We left off in the midst of discussing the qualification, An Elder Must Rule His Own House Well. Now, we want to examine some questions that arise about this particular qualification.

An Elder Must Rule His Own House Well. "One who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?)" {1 Timothy 3:4,5}; "...having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination." {Titus 1:6}

Must an elder step down if he has only one child and that child dies? The child's death in no way negates the father's qualification for the office of elder. He has already met the qualification, and the child's untimely death does not now disqualify him.

If an elder's children leave his home and establish their own homes, then return to the world-must the elder resign? This has long been a sticking point with many brethren. The problem caused by those who take this position is often the result of making an absolute out of a proverb. "Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it." {Proverbs 22:6} Is this an absolute truth? How many of us have known good Christian families who taught their children well, only to have them decide, after the passage of time, for one reason or another, to return to the world? Is this always a reflection on the children's upbringing? Every good parent should reflect on how he trained his children; but we cannot forget that God gave us free will. How long is a parent accountable for his children's conduct? Please read carefully the following passages:

"The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself." {Ezekiel 18:20}

"For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad." {2 Corinthians 5:10}

From these two passages, we learn that God holds each person accountable for his OWN actions. When my children stand before God, I will not be judged with them. I will give account for how I trained them, but they will be responsible for their own actions. Many want to place-on the shoulders of godly men who are seeking to become elders-the burden of adult children who go astray. Yet, these same people are unwilling to apply the same standard to their own lives. When an adult child, for whatever reason, leaves the Lord, in no way is it always a reflection on his or her rearing. What if a young man marries a woman who behaves in an ungodly manner and leads her husband away from the Lord? Does this reflect his father's failure to train him? Certainly, each man must look into his own heart and conscience to answer such questions.

Some may argue that when a man's adult children leave the Lord, it undermines the church's confidence in him. In many cases, this may be true, but I'm convinced it's more a problem with narrow-minded brethren who seek to disqualify elders who cease to be perfect in their eyes. This sometimes depends on the attitude of the flock one is leading. It is a sad commentary on a congregation of the Lord's people when its members are willing to remove a godly man from the eldership, or in some cases, dissolve the eldership, over personal convictions.

If an elder and his wife are unable to have their own children, and they adopt children, can he still meet this qualification? A man is as much a father to adopted children as he is to those who are born to he and his wife. If the children (adopted or not) have been ruled, trained, and disciplined, he has demonstrated his ability to "rule his own house well." As far as I'm concerned, based on a study of the Scriptures, I see this as a non-issue.

What if an elder has four children, and one is not a Christian. Is he qualified? Some take the position that ALL his children must believe, no matter how many he has. The purpose of the qualification is to demonstrate the man's ability to "rule his own house well." If one of the four children obeyed and respected the father's authority while under his oversight, but did not choose to obey the gospel, does that diminish the man's ability to rule his own house? Does it show an overwhelming lack of ability? Such thinking is not in keeping with the purpose for this particular qualification. How does one child's failure to obey the gospel cast doubt on the man's ability to rule? I've know men who chose not to serve because they were conscience-bound and believed ALL their children had to be faithful. This is a proper decision when the man himself makes it. Here again, we must be very careful not to bind personal conviction on the entire congregation, making one person's conscience the standard instead of God's word.

Let me be frank here. People raise any or all of these questions to cast doubt on a man's ability to succeed or fail as a parent. Many conclude that unruly children, no matter when they become unruly, show the parent's inability to "lead his own house well." Let's consider Israel. Who was the father of that nation? Did they disobey God and His laws? The Israelites went after false gods and practiced sexual perversion in the name of religion, even to the point of allowing their own children to pass through the fire as offerings to the god, Molech. Would any of these folks charge God with being a failure as the father of His own people? To be consistent in their reasoning, they MUST bring the same charge against God in heaven! He is our Father {Matthew 23:9}. When one of His children goes back into sin, does it condemn Him as a failure at overseeing our lives? Such reasoning is absolutely wrong. This is exactly the reason for the many false conclusions regarding elders' qualifications. They have not come from the Bible, but from narrow minds!

Clearly, the Scriptures teach that an elder's children must not be unruly. This demonstrates his ability to lead them to Christ-something he needs to be able to do in the Lord's church. The elder's children should not be guilty of "riot." This word is defined as "the disposition of life of one who is abandoned, recklessly debauched; profligacy, dissoluteness." (Greek Lexicon, pg. 58) They must not be unruly-"not made subject, unsubjected. That cannot be subjected to control, disobedient, unruly, refractory, confused," (Thayer's) If they are not in subjection; if he cannot control them in his home, while they reside under his roof, he is not qualified to be an elder.

I believe that, over the years, many good men have been kept from serving as elders because of extreme viewpoints about this particular qualification. Let us be certain we are basing our understanding on the Scriptures and not personal conviction. Sadly, we give way too much time and attention to this qualification, at the expense of some of the others. In next week's bulletin, we will continue looking at the elders' other qualifications.

We will continue this next month.